Climate change denial industry has it’s work cut out.

Chief executive of the Murray Darling Basin Commission Dr. Wendy Craik says fears of a perpetual drought are not alarmist and the basin may need rainfall of “biblical” proportions to reverse the drought.

“The evidence suggests that the drought and lack of water are linked to global warming,” she said.

 “There is a possibility that the sort of conditions we’ve seen over the past few years could continue and we all need to take that into account.”

So, that seems a fairly conclusive statement, surely now it’s apparent to all but the most pig-ignorant of the climate change denialists that not only is climate change an actual phenomenon (contrary to the spurious claims of many conservative commentators) but it is in fact in all likelyhood going to effect us on the local level.

I guess Howard’s Hanrahans will be crowing that climate change is Kevin Rudd’s fault now, he has been PM for almost six months, surely that’s enough time to reverse a global trend resultant from increased industrialisation over recent centuries.

No, apparently the rich becoming slightly less rich after an increase in their private health insurance premiums and (shock, horror) means testing of the plasma telly baby bonus is vastly more important this week.

Ah conservatives, bless ’em, as predictable as a linear equation, what a pity they aren’t as logical. Or as useful.

About alburywodongaonline

Hi I'm Jack Stone (a pseudonym), I'm a long-time Albury resident and I think it's a great place to live and work. I have a strong interest in local events and media and I started this site because I think a different perspective is often needed when reporting local news. I take a keen interest in local politics, as well as what's going on at the state and federal level, I'm also a supporter of social justice issues, the envirionment and the need for people to have a say in the events that effect their lives. I'm a fan of the Border Bandits and I'd love to see both teams take the flag this year, and next year, and maybe the one after that too.
This entry was posted in Editorial, Lifestyle. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Climate change denial industry has it’s work cut out.

  1. Paulidan says:

    Temperatures have been falling for several years, I don’t know if you realize this but you guys are making total fools of yourselves when these last few years you’ve been blaming things on increasing temperatures:P

    Not that I don’t mind all the holes you poke in it…

  2. you’ll notice I use the term “climate change”, I agree the term “global warming” is overly simplistic and doesn’t accurately describe areas where climactic temperatures have actually fallen as a result of human impact on the environment.

    I think a certain amount of scepticism about many things is healthy but in light of the overwhelming weight of evidence that climate change is an actual phenomenon, to deny it goes above and beyond scepticism into the realm of outright ignorance.

  3. raydixon says:

    There’s no doubt the climate is changing. Whether it’s mainly a natural cycle or man-made influences is still up for debate.

    Reduce carbon emissions by all means – I hate pollution anyway – but when I look at that photo above of the near empty Hume weir I can’t help thinking there’d be a lot more water in it if so much wasn’t being sold off downstream for inefficient farming practices.

    I know a lot of work has been put in to making irrigation of farms more efficient but it just might be the case (as cruel as it sounds) that many areas that have relied on water from the Murray have simply had their day. Maybe the farmers should be bought out and offerred assistance to relocate to areas where there is a much more plentiful water supply – like Kunnanurra in W.A.

    The Murray Goulburn and even the Riverina food bowls have sucked the river dry and maybe it’s time they were shut down.

  4. I think a lot of the problems are happening upstream as well, yes I agree inefficient farming practices have to shoulder their share of the blame, I mean growing rice and operating a cotton gin with our meagre water resources? it’s obscene.

    In many ways I think the water levy was a mistake, I realise the intention was to use the money to manage the Murray Darling basin, that doesn’t seem to have occured and charging farmers for water seems to have given them the impression that they are entitled to every last drop.

    I’ve actually heard a farmer at a forum on climate change ask in all seriousness how much of “his water all these native trees along the river banks were sucking up”.
    You can’t reason with that kind of ignorance, it just has to be stamped out.

    I think there will always be a need to grow food crops locally, but growing them in your own back-yard may become increasingly a matter of necessity.

  5. raydixon says:

    Using recycled water for farming seems to be one solution. Why hasn’t that been done? I suppose it’s being “looked into” but I’ve heard nothing about it. There’d be a lot of sewerage out there.

    Oh, I forgot. The Government thinks it’s a bigger priority to spend $8million on a recycled sewerage system for … fckn snow making!

  6. well it would certainly make better sense than indirectly pouring megalitres of super phosphates into our waterways as fertilizer.
    I’m not sure how I’d feel about eating, say, a carrot that has been grown in “pure” poo but there are plenty of alternatives.

    Composting toilets have been available to organic gardeners for some time, my grandad used to use human effluent as fertilizer back in the days of the night-cart man too.
    I don’t see why we couldn’t look at a similar system now, it’d have to reduce the need for intensive chemical fertilizers which could only be a good thing.

  7. dawson says:

    If you reused every drop of water which currently goes through our sewrage systems locally, you’d probably have enough water for (at most) a hundred farms.
    Farms are thirsty beasts. My own water allocation, which is very modest, equals the water used by 70 Melbourne households – and I’m on less than 10 acres.
    So if you recycled all of the water from a town the size of, say, Bright, you might provide enough water for one 200 acre farm (and we’re in a high rainfall area anyway, so don’t need much irrigation). All of Albury Wodonga would do, say, half a dozen big farms.
    The amount of water used by households is miniscule.

  8. which raises questions about effectiveness of water restrictions in the first instance doesn’t it?

    I realise food crops require a good deal of water, and I’m certainly in favour of maintaining food production going at the local level as a matter of necessity.

    I think when we are at a point where we can confidently say we are maximising water efficiency we can relax about it, until then there will always be work to be done in improving and maximising the efficiency of our water usage.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s